About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
are not in a position to do things that we otherwise would be in a position to in terms of shaping the environment to prevent war. so in my view, americas 60 veto fiscal picture increases the risk of conflict around the globe media not always involving the u.s., though certainly the risk of increasing globally. based on our fiscal picture. the point that i would want to make is the budget deal requires us to deal with a full deck of cards and those people who keep wanting to take things off the table. when i say a full deck of cards, that includes defense participating in deficit reduction. this cannot be in the case of defense a sledgehammer approach. it's going to take a long line of dealing with these issues overtime to give the defense department time and they can make in my view very significant changes in the budget, but doing it in a way that does not damage our security. doing it abruptly as the fiscal cliff does or in a very compressed time frame is not only inefficient and dangerous to security in our s. my final point is that they are missing an element in this town is primarily politic
on the overall security environment on the peninsula as well as in asia. >> did you follow up anything new? we been hearing rumblings for a time. anything new you can provide in terms of insight into lunches are things like that? >> i think you're tracking it pretty well for the media today there are indications of what they will call a satellite launch. we believe it is still the u.n. security resolutions because of the missile they'll be fired and the implications it has for ballistic missiles activity somewhere down the road and the destabilizing impact it will have on the security environment throughout the region, not just dependent. >> can you follow up on some of that? what is your assessment? they say they saw birth of her problems at their failed launch. what is your assessment? how could they have felt the problems? juicier ran possibly helping them? and do you think he's doing this in response to hard-liners in his own government? why would he be doing this? >> well, the professed reason is to probably do it in conjunction with the anniversary on the 17th, which is widely reported i
what they are doing here and implications in the overall security environment on the korean peninsula, as well as destination. >> anything new? we been hearing some rumblings for some time that there might be some activity on that front. anything new that you can provide in terms of insights into launches or things like that? >> well, i think you're tracking a pretty well. i think from the media today there are indications declared indications of their intention to do what they would call a peaceful satellite launch. and we believe it is in contradictory to the u.n. security council resolutions, that because of the nature of the type of missile they will be firing and the implications it has for ballistic missile type of activity somewhere down the road, and the destabilizing impact that will have on security incitement throughout the throughout the region, not just on the peninsula. >> can you follow up on some of -- was short assessment? they say they have solve whatever problems they had with her april failed launch. what's your assessment? how could they have solve the problem? wh
look at jobs report tomorrow, is dismal. we're liking inflationary environment down the road. this is bad news. >> you could could make the argument invite blowing past short term helpful, long term payne full. melissa: spending cuts, tax hikes are very dramatic going over the cliff. when you look at numbers, still is like five to one raising taxes to cutting spending. >> that's right. melissa: no one is really talking about cutting spending. isn't that the first thing you would do? if your fiscal house was in such disarray, household at home, first thing you do is stop spending. no one is doing that. >> what scares me, is that point. whether you agree or disagree hiking taxes i am not a fan of it but i think it will come. we can get past this. charlie gasparino and i have argued this. one of the consequences of the election the president will probably get his way raising most rates. melissa: right. >> i'm not saying i'm a fan. let's get past that, let's make it happen. republicans realize you lost election you didn't suddenly lose your backbone. this should be precursor gett
to implement. i will say, however, that the value of doing it now in a low interest rate environment is substantially larger on these new loans for two reasons. the lower the interest rate, the faster the amortization of the principal and therefore this will be a more valuable change. second because these loans are so low interest rate, they will be on our books far larger. frankly, not many loans in the past have hit that limit. so even though it's $1 trillion portfolio, the value of that change is quite small for the old loans. it's really going to be quite valuable for these newer very low interest rate loans. >> i'll be briefly two more questions. i see that f.h.a. is now making loans to people who three years ago were foreclosed upon. and that's a very different standard than even exists at fannie and freddie. i don't understand. why are you doing that? >> this is another area where we are working on changes. here's the issue. we have a significant number of homeowners that were responsible homeowners, had good credit scores that lost their jobs in the biggest economic crisis th
left, let's talk about the current environment. what are you hearing from a lot of the senior executives that are asking for your advice or if you're in a board room or chatting with them especially in terms of the fiscal cliff and concern about making big decisions or lack thereof and not putting money at it. >> the interesting part is talk about the fiscal cliff is the talk about the talk about the fiscal cliff. i don't think people are as concerned as the level of chatter that goes around. i think the chatter is more than the concern. the fiscal cliff just happens to be a preset deal on a scale of one to ten. it's a deal that is possible as outcome. i think what the country should hope for is that we come up with a better deal. business wants the rules. i understand why business is very much do a deal. do a something. because a business then can make their plans around that. if a marginal tax rate goes up too high here, they'll put a plant somewhere else. you can make those decisions. they want to know the rules. >> know the rules of the road. >> there's an america out ther
americans who saved it do not have enough for environment. lori: should average investors follow the institutions? >> yeah, you know, one of the things we are seeing is a lot of institutions have held off or have looked at managing risk and mitigating in their own portfolios. you are looking at this longer-term investing. writing to the store. looking at structures that allow you to mitigate risk and have better sleeping at night. you cannot fund a retirement by earning a half of a percent of 1% and a stable money market fund or bond. you will need to take some risk. sure. i was just going to come in with a risk. should i go risk on all the way and really go crazy and put in some, you know -- [talking over each other] >> it all depends on what your circumstances are. if you have some longer-term horizons, you should be looking out what type of risk you can look at in the portfolio. the big dynamic change has been risks moving from i do not want to miss the upside to a game i want to watch and protect my principal. it is about risk budgeting now more than the way i need to allocat
. this fuel is lauded as great for the environment and a good thing. some manufacture you ares are saying guess what, it will void your warranty if you use this fuel in certain cars . what do you make of this whole thing? >> melissa, what happened this is good example where the government mandates picking winners and losers and forcing decisions on the part of consumers which could be harmful to consumers. comment by aaa coming out to say the decision to allow for e15 blend or 15% of their gasoline to be derived from biofuels, in this case ethanol, the auto manufacturers have said they will not honor their warranties if people use this fuel which is potentially harmful to their engines. the automakers researched this. melissa: it is amazing because they say i void your warranty. >> yeah. melissa: can you imagine you buy the fuel and put it among the manufacturers, chrysler, gm, toyota, especially in older vehicles and look at your manufacturers website if you're in this group, what happens with the e15 the fuel separates and ethanol in there is highly corrosive to your engine. is this new
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)